User talk:Philafrenzy/Archive 16
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | → | Archive 20 |
Disambiguation link notification for June 24
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Rudolf Allers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page St. Thomas. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Hamza Tzortzis for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hamza Tzortzis is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamza Tzortzis until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Adam9007 (talk) 23:44, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Pietro Annigoni's portraits of Elizabeth II
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pietro Annigoni's portraits of Elizabeth II you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wugapodes -- Wugapodes (talk) 16:01, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Pietro Annigoni's portraits of Elizabeth II
The article Pietro Annigoni's portraits of Elizabeth II you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold 
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Pietro Annigoni's portraits of Elizabeth II for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wugapodes -- Wugapodes (talk) 16:41, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Hermann Parzinger for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hermann Parzinger is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hermann Parzinger until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Bearcat (talk) 13:22, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
2nd AfD nomination for Lima Publishing article...
Not sure if you want to participate in this one, but I have re-nominated the article for Lima Publishing for deletion. If you vote delete for this one, then might be able to get the article deleted this time. 76.235.248.47 (talk) 12:37, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Proposal to rename category
Please see my proposal to speedily rename Category:Bruneian business people to Category:Bruneian businesspeople Hugo999 (talk) 02:16, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for July 19
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Dennis Byng, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Annealed. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:23, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Dennis Byng
Hello! Your submission of Dennis Byng at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! David Eppstein (talk) 20:17, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia and United Nations Women Project
  | |
|---|---|
|
Wikipedia and United Nations Women Project | |
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) Delivered by Rosiestep (talk) via MassMessage 04:27, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Dennis Byng
On 23 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dennis Byng, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that American sculptor Dennis Byng worked in plexiglas and lucite? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dennis Byng. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Dennis Byng), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:47, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Indigenous women & Polar women editathons
 | |
|---|---|
|
Indigenous women editathon & Polar women editathon | |
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 21:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage
Disambiguation link notification for July 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Charles II Street, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Pall Mall. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:32, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
This is just a reminder that Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge kicks off today, with the first subject being Bristol. Please remember to post entries under your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject England/The West Country Challenge/Bristol. You are receiving this message because you are listed as a participant in the challenge.
Happy editing! --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:46, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
The first leg is Bristol. Names are to be added at the bottom of the Bristol page and articles listed. Please also make sure that you add entries you improve/start to the main list on the main page. There will be £10 to win each day for the most points accumulated and then the winner of the county crowned after three days. The overall winner will be decided from the points accumulated from each county round. If you're not interested in winning anything and want to contribute anything you want from the West Country this is fine too though. Best of luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:01, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Pietro Annigoni's portraits of Elizabeth II
The article Pietro Annigoni's portraits of Elizabeth II you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Pietro Annigoni's portraits of Elizabeth II for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wugapodes -- Wugapodes (talk) 01:21, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
Replaceable fair use File:Mount House, Monken Hadley.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Mount House, Monken Hadley.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
- Go to the file description page and add the text
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing<your reason>with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable. - On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Wrong sort key, bare URLs, and there's a useful NHLE template you could have used. Are you creating too many stubs too fast? PamD 06:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- No. If you find something wrong just fix it Pam. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:28, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 25
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Leopold Redpath, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Northern Railway Company. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Upcoming editathons: Women in Nursing & Women Labor Activists
  | |
|---|---|
|
Women in Nursing editathon & Women Labor Activists editathon | |
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 16:44, 27 August 2016 (UTC) via MassMessage
Orphaned non-free image File:Hanover Housing Association logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Hanover Housing Association logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:24, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Hey
Today, I fixed about 100-250 biographies of philatelists, and if you'd like to check out my edits, you are more than welcome to do so.
So, what I did, was, I added the (age 2015) format thing on the biographies, and I added complete birth and death dates in the actual articles where they should be Liamkasbar (talk) 22:36, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi there. I've started a new initiative, the Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. It's a long term goal to bring about 10,000 article improvements to the UK and Ireland. Through two contests involving just six or seven weeks of editing so far we've produced over 1500 improvements. Long term if we have more people chipping it and adding articles they've edited independently as well from all areas of the UK then reaching that target is all possible. I think it would be an amazing achievement to see 10,000 article improvements by editors chipping in. If you support this and think you might want to contribute towards this long term please sign up in the Contributors section. No obligations, just post work on anything you feel like whenever you want, though try to avoid basic stubs if possible as we're trying to reduce the overall stub count and improve general comprehension and quality. Thanks. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:31, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Mind explaining why you engaged in wholesale reverting rather than addressing any individual issues you may have had with my edits, and why you left these MOS violations, which I had addressed to the best of my ability (see [1]):
- "Reinstate last good version" -- graceless edit summary
- "but Samuel was inclined to be irascible" -- blatant POV/OR
- "Samuel married the similarly effervescent Mercy Haystead in 1966." -- blatant POV/OR
- http://www.glamourgirlsofthesilverscreen.com/show/463/Beth+Rogan/ -- bare barereflink, which I had fixed
I acknowledge having removedAfter her death, home-grown [[cannabis]] was found drying in the [[airing cupboard]] at her home. as irrelevant and unexplained textual exegesis and possible synthetic text but I see that is debatable. Fair enough; I will restore it. Quis separabit? 13:01, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Yours, Quis separabit? 13:01, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
- I tried to work with your version but have had to reinstate the old version again. I realise your changes were in good faith but you seriously broke the refs and didn't notice until I pointed it out. Then you tried to fix them but they were still wrong. Originally it had 8 refs to the Rogan obit in The Telegraph and one to the Samuel obit. Your version broke this to give one to the Rogan obit and 7 to Samuel thus misrepresenting the sources of the article. I suggest that you leave a message here or on the talk page before changing it again in order that we avoid an edit-war over it. There was no OR or POV, it all came from material in the obituaries but it seems you didn't read them or you would have known that. By the way, Glamourgirls was an external link, not a ref. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:37, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Foyles Building has been nominated for Did You Know
Hello, Philafrenzy. Foyles Building, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know
. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Constance Travis
Hi there, we seem to have some disagreement on sufficient references for Constance Travis. Whilst some of it is quite well referenced (and admittedly I can't access the Times obit beyond the free preview), I do feel quite a lot of info in the article is not backed up with sources. 2 film appearances and 3 'selected' stage roles with just one ref for one of them. There's loads of stuff that isn't backed up by references. It may be in the times or northampton chronicle but isn't referenced in the article. for example the 2nd ref says she was born in stockport. the article says she was born in stockport. but the article does not link to the ref at that point. the article claims she was confined to a wheelchair from the age of 78. very specific. where's the proof?? the article says the trust had £27m in TP shares. (i don't like this because it should state MV as of when! or more specifics. shares fluctuate. it could've been worth £24.6m or £29.8m by the time the obit hit the presses.) from my point of view, i come to this article and see 2 refs. i can't access one so i take it at face value - can't argue against what i don't see. but what i see is a lot of claims - from DoB to trust being largest (technically unreferenced and not quite in source) to middle name to filmography, throughout the article I feel there's an obscene amount of statements in there that shouldn't be. in the interest of wp:bold and wp:irs i feel the tag is fully justified unless you can suggest a reason why it isn't. Whilst the other option is to {{cn}} every unreferenced statement, i feel there's so much, and such a huge proportion of the article unreferenced, that {{refimprove}} is fair and more appropriate, and shows other editors and users/readers that this article contains many statements that aren't necessarily confirmed as fact. I'm not against the content on the article, i found it quite informative, i enjoyed reading it, but i was just very frustrated seeing what seems like a serious lack of sources. as far as i can see, this is a candidate for improving references all day long!! so i'm putting the tags back but happy to hear your thoughts if you don't think they belong.Rayman60 (talk) 01:49, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Joan Bates princess of Sealand.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Joan Bates princess of Sealand.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:50, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Black Cultural Archives logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Black Cultural Archives logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Linking to author articles
Hello, Philafrenzy! Thanks for cross-referencing J. T. Munby in that reference at Portchester Castle, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to use regular wikilinks in citation templates—for one thing it’s a form of overlinking to link both the first- and last-name parameters, but of course having only part of the name in blue would look silly. Although I‘m not sure of the technical aspects, it seems likely the template code will expect to find plain text in those fields, and might get confused by the pipe character in particular. Anyway, it’s best instead to add an authorlink(#)= parameter providing the article name (without the double brackets), matching the corresponding first(#)= and last(#)= fields. See my last edit there for example, or for that matter the entries that were already in that citation for the first author.—Odysseus1479 00:16, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, I knew there was away to do it but couldn't remember what it was. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:18, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
An article cannot cast doubt on someone's qualifications without a good reason. – Smyth\talk 21:34, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
- I haven't looked at it for a while but I believe my reading of the sources was that they don't say that he actually has a degree from Cambridge, hence my doubt. I don't have a Cambridge degree either so it is not intended as a criticism of him. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:08, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
It's entirely conventional to say someone "read [subject] at [university]" without saying explicitly that they received a degree. Since you have no reason to believe either that he does or he doesn't, I think my wording is reasonable. – Smyth\talk 21:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
- I know it is but I had more reason than that for that wording. I will look at the sources again. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:22, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Please do. – Smyth\talk 09:10, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
- I looked at it and still find no evidence he graduated, just this which says he "read". I note what you say but in my experience those who didn't finish also say they "read" something somewhere in order to avoid saying they failed to get a degree. I have changed it to "studied" which we have a source for but I note that the article is not in the relevant alumni category and I don't think it should be at present. If we find a source saying he graduated, we can "upgrade" him! Philafrenzy (talk) 10:34, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. – Smyth\talk 11:25, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Invitation to Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons
 .jpg)
| |
|---|---|
|
Women in Architecture & Women in Archaeology editathons | |
(To subscribe, Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe, Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 20:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Disambiguation link notification for October 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alfred Harmsworth (1837-1889), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Northern Railway Company. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your work and joining the Challenge! I'm currently running the Africa contest. I know you have a love of philately like myself. If there's any stubs you think you might improve or anything you might promote to GA as part of it go for it, there's decent prizes for it, though I suspect that won't bother you! Would be great to see some African philately articles done as part of this, ww2censor is welcome too! Entries will join the Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge at the end of the contest unless anybody objects but at the current rate the Africa one might soon catch the UK haha.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:47, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- I will take a look. I think most of the African stamp articles are stubs. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:04, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I looked at Chad, it's largely unsourced, and Burundi still stubby. For the Destubathon all that is required is 1.5kb minimum readable prose and no unsourced claims. It's aimed at basic article improvements and improving consistency. The African stamp articles could certainly do with some reinforcement and removing the stub tags. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:07, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- As far as modern Africa is concerned, so to speak, the problem is that all the stamps are still copyright making it a challenge to include more than one or two non-free images. The colonial era is less of a problem of course. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:25, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, I looked at Chad, it's largely unsourced, and Burundi still stubby. For the Destubathon all that is required is 1.5kb minimum readable prose and no unsourced claims. It's aimed at basic article improvements and improving consistency. The African stamp articles could certainly do with some reinforcement and removing the stub tags. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:07, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Incomplete DYK nomination
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Sir Hildebrand Harmsworth, 1st Baronet at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; see step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 07:30, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
10,000 article challenge
I wonder if you have you been adding your recent creations to the list at Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge though I do see you were notified. They are almost as 2,100. ww2censor (talk) 09:14, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, I am investigating it. Philafrenzy (talk) 12:16, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- All you need to do is to add those article that fit into the criteria to the list which is basically anything Irish or GB related you have recently created. ww2censor (talk) 13:24, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, I have gone back six months. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:57, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- Amazing body of work. Yes it began around March really when the Awaken the Dragon contest was launched. We'll do one for Ireland next year sometime, sooner now as I'm seeing more support from Ireland and little support from Scotland or Northern England, so potentially we could do one for Ireland next springtime. The first 1100 entries were produced in just a few weeks! Wikipedia:WikiProject Wales/Awaken the Dragon/Article improvements and creations. Would love to see that happen for Ireland.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:09, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- They have their own chapter now so you could enlist them. I think they had a big push on WLM last year. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:28, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, I have gone back six months. Philafrenzy (talk) 19:57, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
- All you need to do is to add those article that fit into the criteria to the list which is basically anything Irish or GB related you have recently created. ww2censor (talk) 13:24, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Thank you- to Philafrenzy for the barnstar.
- Then a question to both Dr. Blofeld as well - I haven't added as far back as March to the 10,000. I could add almost everything I've created (not quite all) if I did that. Should I? ☕ Antiqueight haver 22:32, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) I see that the earliest listed are from back in February, so I assume that will be a yes from Dr. Blofeld. ww2censor (talk) 23:01, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
- If you like, but it would be good if entries done in early month could be dispersed among the list where other articles were produced at the same sort of time, rather than the recent entries being as far back as that. At this rate though we'll have to make it the 100,000 Challenge soon enough ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Foyles Building
On 19 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Foyles Building, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Blitz, staff of the Foyles Building stacked copies of Hitler's Mein Kampf on the roof in lieu of sandbags? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Foyles Building. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Foyles Building), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Apologies
I now see at the top it was published in 1912 so they are falsely claiming they have the rights. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:32, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
An invitation to November's events
 
| |
|---|---|
|
Announcing two exciting online editathons | |
(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 18:07, 23 October 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging
John Miles (fl.1404)
Okay so you added John Miles (fl.1404), I put it on John Miles, but noticed there is a red link for someone who might be the same guy-is it? (The first name listed) Wgolf (talk) 20:07, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for noticing. Yes it is the same person I am sure. I wouldn't call him a career politician however. We know almost nothing about him and he appears to have served just one term. Philafrenzy (talk) 20:15, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Page in question
The page in question of John de Bury does not meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article", seen on Subheading 3, WP:Politician.
--WilliamKingstonCox (talk) 11:21, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
- You have misread it. It is clause 1) "Politicians and judges who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members or former members of a national, state or provincial legislature". 3) is for "local official[s], or an unelected candidate". Philafrenzy (talk) 11:24, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Sir Hildebrand Harmsworth, 1st Baronet
On 27 October 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sir Hildebrand Harmsworth, 1st Baronet, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the newspaper publisher Sir Hildebrand Harmsworth gave money to a charity fund after his chauffeur killed a boy while driving Harmsworth's car? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sir Hildebrand Harmsworth, 1st Baronet. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Sir Hildebrand Harmsworth, 1st Baronet), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 01:12, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
I have unreviewed a page you curated
Hi, I'm AirCitar. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Raphael Demos, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. AirCitar (talk) 11:30, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Raphael Demos
Hello! Your submission of Raphael Demos at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 22:25, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Former manors in Hertfordshire
A tag has been placed on Category:Former manors in Hertfordshire requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. —swpbT 13:11, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Mieczyslaw S. Ostojski
The article Mieczyslaw S. Ostojski has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (biographies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:32, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi, Sorry to cause you that extra work reverting my errors; I actually didn't know the MOS point about the wls in quotes. But why not UC for book titles? Also, is there any information regarding the reasons for Eaton's suicide? Regards, Ericoides (talk) 12:54, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- No problem, thanks for your additions. I think it is upper case for proper names in book titles but not otherwise as excessive capitalisation is oppressive to read but I am not sure if the MOS states that. Most modern reference systems advise that I think. Yes, I didn't say exactly why he committed suicide as the source didn't. Such things were covered-up then, but I think it is implicit in the drinking, withdrawal of his promotion, and failed marriage, all mentioned earlier in the article. Philafrenzy (talk) 13:03, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. The MOS states that book titles use title case (its example is The Unbearable Lightness of Being), i.e. caps for all but "certain less important words" (see here). The minimal caps style you are using for book titles would be appropriate for article titles. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 17:16, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's useful. I have just looked it up in this book which states with reference to Harvard and Vancouver referencing "capitalise the first letter of the first word of the title and any proper nouns" (p. 9 & 86). Evidently the MOS doesn't agree. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:37, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- Interesting mention of the use of "committed suicide" the other day on R4. Suicide#Definitions suggests some alternatives, "died by suicide" or simply "killed him/herself". I'd never really thought this through before. I'm leaning towards "killed him/herself", at least in any new articles that I may start. Edwardx (talk) 23:38, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
- I agree, killed him/herself is straight forward and non-judgemental. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:05, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Lionel Crouch
Could I ask you about the notability of Lionel Crouch? As far as I can tell, there is not much there that makes him notable. His story appears similar to that of many other officers who fought (and died) in the First World War. Similar sources (local newspaper reports, school memorials, and other specialist memorial sources) could be used to write articles on thousands of other British military personnel. I'd quite happily write such articles myself, but I've avoided that on Wikipedia as I don't think such articles really meet the current notability guidelines. FWIW, the CWGC casualty details are here, though they don't say much more. I have plans to at some point list the CWGC war dead who have Wikipedia articles, or who are mentioned in Wikipedia articles - mainly those articles with links to the CWGC database. Carcharoth (talk) 22:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- It's under construction, but as I see it, he's notable for having written his own account of his experiences at the front which was published by his father after the war. He and his brother were also prominent locally. I haven't gone through the local newspapers yet but if you add that coverage to the book, the philatelic material (also to be done), memorials etc, its more than enough to pass the GNG. You are too pessimistic about the article opportunities for this sort of subject. I encourage you to write the stories of these men. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:41, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Heh. I probably should. If everyone who published (or had published later by relatives) an account of their experiences at the front, that will be quite a lot of material to work with. I will probably concentrate for now on the clearly notable people, but if others object to the coverage at this level, do let me know as I may be able to help with some WWI sources. In case you were wondering, I found this article through a notification from a link you made to the cemetery where he is buried. Carcharoth (talk) 22:49, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- I am not arguing they are all notable of course, and there may be some borderline cases, but if we have a published biography, even a collection of letters, and you add that to the other sources we now have such as British Newspaper Archive, London Gazette, etc, I think there is a very good chance that they meet GNG. If there are medals too, who would argue? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:58, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Practically everyone who served in WWI got some sort of campaign medal. All officers will have had their commission gazetted. Practically all the officers that died had their picture published in the newspapers in a pictorial roll of honour. Everyone appeared on a local war memorial. I agree that if there is more than this, then you start to meet GNG, but some of these sources you are mentioning are too common to really help with assessing notability. Anyway, an example of an article to be written on (relatively speaking) more notable people would be George Norman Bowes Forster, a relatively minor (brigadier) general, but one of many who died in WWI. There are some lists knocking around in userspace for those generals (such as here). There is a bit about Forster here. I know in practice people write about what takes their interest (all the way down the notability scale), but I've always thought that in an ideal world the more notable people would be written about first, or is that the wrong way to think about it? Carcharoth (talk) 23:08, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think you will get most editors to write about subjects that are important but which don't interest them, not while we are working for free anyway. I agree with your comments about those sources, they are supporting only but if combined with one killer fact or source such as a biography or medal for gallantry, they round out the article and make a compelling case for the GNG overall. I would say Forster is a case in point with a biography already written and a DSO. What are you waiting for? Philafrenzy (talk) 23:17, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Time and money! :-) Hmm. Sketch of his original grave (before the CWGC headstone was erected) on page 48 of the book. And a poem by Ernest Hartley Coleridge. I presume (from the mention in the article) that you have already found this (one of many memorial databases out there)? Various pictures around of the memorial plaque. Would be a nice addition to the article at some point. Which reminds, me, I have other editing I need to get back to. Good luck with expanding the article on Lionel Crouch. Carcharoth (talk) 23:27, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for the sources. I look forward to reading your article on Forster. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:29, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- I am not arguing they are all notable of course, and there may be some borderline cases, but if we have a published biography, even a collection of letters, and you add that to the other sources we now have such as British Newspaper Archive, London Gazette, etc, I think there is a very good chance that they meet GNG. If there are medals too, who would argue? Philafrenzy (talk) 22:58, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
- Heh. I probably should. If everyone who published (or had published later by relatives) an account of their experiences at the front, that will be quite a lot of material to work with. I will probably concentrate for now on the clearly notable people, but if others object to the coverage at this level, do let me know as I may be able to help with some WWI sources. In case you were wondering, I found this article through a notification from a link you made to the cemetery where he is buried. Carcharoth (talk) 22:49, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
An addendum: deletion discussions like this are why I am wary of writing such articles. There may be fundamental differences, but a lot of effort can be wasted in borderline cases if the eventual result is deletion. Carcharoth (talk) 08:00, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
- I understand what you are saying and it seems too that the more effort that has gone into an article, the greater the pleasure some people take in nominating it for deletion, but we shouldn't be afraid to create articles on people we sincerely believe to be notable just because someone might AFD them. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:17, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
DYK for Alfred Harmsworth (1837–1889)
On 11 November 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Alfred Harmsworth (1837–1889), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Alfred Harmsworth (pictured) was the father of two viscounts, one baron, and two baronets? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Alfred Harmsworth (1837–1889)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
— Maile (talk) 01:11, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Sydney Eardley-Wilmot
Hello! Your submission of Sydney Eardley-Wilmot at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Jack1956 (talk) 21:41, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Nomination of Richard Perlhagen for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Richard Perlhagen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Perlhagen until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TomStar81 (Talk) 09:14, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Philafrenzy. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
December 2016 at Women in Red
| |
|---|---|
|
Two new topics for our online editathons | |
(To subscribe: Women in Red/Invite list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) --Rosiestep (talk) 22:43, 23 November 2016 (UTC) via MassMessaging
Incomplete DYK nominations
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Essex Street, London at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 00:09, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Template:Did you know nominations/Marylebone Lane at the Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{db-g7}}, or ask a DYK admin. Thank you. DYKHousekeepingBot (talk) 00:09, 24 November 2016 (UTC)